People in upper middle class U.S. circles have a very skewed perception of the popularity of iPhones (almost everyone has them). The vast majority of mobile phones in use worldwide run Android.
An Android is good to talk on the phone, get SMS, and throw it out after 2 years. If it charges when you plug it into the charger 90% of the time you are doing pretty good.
In rural areas of the United States we have a system of factory constructed housing which is scaled in cost to the low cost of land.
Go into such a "trailer" (I have) and you may likely find somebody with a Amazon Fire tablet who is not really sure that it has anything to do with Amazon or that it is a Fire, etc.
It is a great piece of hardware for what it costs, you can get most of the software you want to work on it by sideloading and have better luck than Bluestacks, SHIELD and similar solutions. (No matter what they will serve up offensive ads for games you will never play.)
People say "Android Tablets are dead" but no the Fire is very viable if you want something to read PDF files on the bus and not feel bad to treat it rough because the replacement cost is so low.
>For instance the zombie OS Android has great value to Apple because if it didn't exist then antitrust regulators would be at Apple's throat
I've only had one android device remain usable significantly longer than 1 year.
True but irrelevant to the original point: Apple claims the lions share of mobile profits.
Apple is perfectly happy for their competitors to focus on raw sales numbers vs. profits. I would be too if I were them.
Another analogy - complaining you didn't win the Presidency while talking about the popular vote vs. electoral college.